Crowdsourcing in Computer Vision

Computer vision systems require large amounts of manually annotated data to properly learn challenging visual concepts. Crowdsourcing platforms offer an inexpensive method to capture human knowledge and understanding, for a vast number of visual perception tasks. In this survey, we describe the types of annotations computer vision researchers have collected using crowdsourcing, and how they have ensured that this data is of high quality while annotation effort is minimized. We begin by discussing data collection on both classic (e.g., object recognition) and recent (e.g., visual story-telling) vision tasks. We then summarize key design decisions for creating effective data collection interfaces and workflows, and present strategies for intelligently selecting the most important data instances to annotate. Finally, we conclude with some thoughts on the future of crowdsourcing in computer vision.Comment: A 69-page meta review of the field, Foundations and Trends in Computer Graphics and Vision, 201

Much Ado About Time: Exhaustive Annotation of Temporal Data

Large-scale annotated datasets allow AI systems to learn from and build upon the knowledge of the crowd. Many crowdsourcing techniques have been developed for collecting image annotations. These techniques often implicitly rely on the fact that a new input image takes a negligible amount of time to perceive. In contrast, we investigate and determine the most cost-effective way of obtaining high-quality multi-label annotations for temporal data such as videos. Watching even a short 30-second video clip requires a significant time investment from a crowd worker; thus, requesting multiple annotations following a single viewing is an important cost-saving strategy. But how many questions should we ask per video? We conclude that the optimal strategy is to ask as many questions as possible in a HIT (up to 52 binary questions after watching a 30-second video clip in our experiments). We demonstrate that while workers may not correctly answer all questions, the cost-benefit analysis nevertheless favors consensus from multiple such cheap-yet-imperfect iterations over more complex alternatives. When compared with a one-question-per-video baseline, our method is able to achieve a 10% improvement in recall 76.7% ours versus 66.7% baseline) at comparable precision (83.8% ours versus 83.0% baseline) in about half the annotation time (3.8 minutes ours compared to 7.1 minutes baseline). We demonstrate the effectiveness of our method by collecting multi-label annotations of 157 human activities on 1,815 videos.Comment: HCOMP 2016 Camera Read

An introduction to crowdsourcing for language and multimedia technology research

Language and multimedia technology research often relies on large manually constructed datasets for training or evaluation of algorithms and systems. Constructing these datasets is often expensive with significant challenges in terms of recruitment of personnel to carry out the work. Crowdsourcing methods using scalable pools of workers available on-demand offers a flexible means of rapid low-cost construction of many of these datasets to support existing research requirements and potentially promote new research initiatives that would otherwise not be possible

Crowdsourcing a Word-Emotion Association Lexicon

Even though considerable attention has been given to the polarity of words (positive and negative) and the creation of large polarity lexicons, research in emotion analysis has had to rely on limited and small emotion lexicons. In this paper we show how the combined strength and wisdom of the crowds can be used to generate a large, high-quality, word-emotion and word-polarity association lexicon quickly and inexpensively. We enumerate the challenges in emotion annotation in a crowdsourcing scenario and propose solutions to address them. Most notably, in addition to questions about emotions associated with terms, we show how the inclusion of a word choice question can discourage malicious data entry, help identify instances where the annotator may not be familiar with the target term (allowing us to reject such annotations), and help obtain annotations at sense level (rather than at word level). We conducted experiments on how to formulate the emotion-annotation questions, and show that asking if a term is associated with an emotion leads to markedly higher inter-annotator agreement than that obtained by asking if a term evokes an emotion